The routine operation of an optical microscope requires the frequent adjustment of multiple controls including, but not limited to those for specimen position, focus and magnification selection. In traditional microscope designs, the locations of these controls have been determined primarily by functional and engineering considerations. Specimen positioning controls have been, for example, typically located in the plane of the microscope stage which holds the specimen. The X- and Y- stage position controls, to effect movement of the stage, have been typically spaced apart and are often at right angles to each other. This approach has resulted in simple, robust microscope designs that have offered accurate adjustability. Such designs are, however, difficult for an operator to use on an extended basis due to the need for the operator to continually be changing hand position and reaching to grasp controls dispersed over a substantial spatial volume. In many cases, operator access to these controls has been also limited either by control orientation or by access paths being blocked by other microscope components.
Newer microscope designs incorporate features that address the ergonomic aspects of microscope use. The specimen positioning controls in these designs, for example, are typically oriented perpendicular to rather than in the plane of the microscope stage. A further change has been to make the X- and Y- axis stage position controls coaxial such that both controls can readily be addressed by one hand with minimal change in hand position. Similarly, focus controls are typically located near the base of the microscope frame rather than in the traditional position higher up on the support column. These changes improve the ergonomics of microscope utilization by clustering the most frequently used controls in a limited spatial volume between the work surface and the stage that is not obstructed by other microscope components. However, while these newer designs represent a substantial ergonomic improvement over traditional designs, it has been well documented that extended use of such microscopes can result in repetitive motion and other ergonomically related injuries to the operator.
Numerous attempts have been made to further improve the ergonomic aspects of microscope operation by motorizing the most common control functions. These approaches replace the manual actuators for specimen position, focus and, occasionally magnification selection, with electric (or rarely hydraulic or pneumatic) actuators. The operator controls for these "motorized" microscopes are housed in one or more units that are physically separate from the microscope and connected to the microscope by electrical cables. The remote control units are typically in the form of consoles or boxes housing the necessary operator controls, but are occasionally in the form of a computer keyboard or similar device. Some, but by no means all of these devices improve the ergonomics of microscope utilization over that of an otherwise identical non-motorized microscope.
One limitation of such devices is the proliferation of controls that must be accessed by the operator. For example, magnification selection on a non-motorized microscope is typically controlled by manually rotating a ring located on the microscope nosepiece. The motorized equivalent typically utilizes one selection control (for example, a push-button) for each of the four to six nosepiece locations. The number of controls that must be dealt with by the operator when performing this function therefore increases from one to four or more. Similar considerations pertain to specimen positioning and focus adjustment. Some effort has been made to combine related functions into a single multi-functional control. Examples include using a multi-position switch for magnification selection or joysticks to control stage speed and focus position. Even the best developed of these multi-function controllers, however, require the operator to frequently shift hand position in order to access the various controls.
The ergonomics of switch controllers are also sub-optimal. Joystick controllers for example, require the operator's hand to rest in a non-neutral position and, in many designs, requires the use of fine rather than large muscle groups to exercise control. Both of these factors impose stresses on the muscles that may ultimately result in repetitive motion injury. The common practice of packaging such controls in a console or box raises the heights of these controls significantly above the level of the work surface and further contributes to muscle strain. In the worst designs, the transition between the work and control surfaces is in the form of a ledge against which the hand rests when using the controls. This continuous pressure against an edge has been shown in some conditions to result in neurological injury to operators.
It is accordingly a principle object of the present invention to combine all frequently accessed controls for a motorized microscope into a single multi-functional control unit.
A further object is to provide a multi-functional microscope control unit that relocates all frequently accessed control functions to approximately the level of the work surface.
Yet another object of the present invention is to provide a multifunctional microscope control unit that positions all frequently accessed controls to: a) minimize the amount of hand motion required to execute any control function; b) utilize major rather than fine muscle group motions to actuate the controls; and c) allow the operator's hand to remain in a neutral rest position while exercising these control functions.